Individuals and businesses today communicate through a variety of messages including electronic mail (including e-mails with video or voice attachments or AOL™ “instant messages”), pager messages, facsimile (fax) and electronic voice mail.
In many cases these messages are managed by more than one computer program. Such multi-program solutions are cumbersome as they generally require significant familiarity with more than one program and further require accessing each program to manage the receipt and dispatch of different types of messages. This results in loss of time and overly complex means for achieving user objectives.
Single programs for managing such variety of messages are known, but such known programs do not provide full remote access via the Internet to management of messages and contact information. The use of the Internet is desirable for numerous reasons, including the common use of the Internet Protocol as a communication standard, the general availability of electronic devices that are web-enabled and the cost savings of using the Internet. Full Internet access is desirable because message and contact management users may want to access their message and contact management system from a plurality of locations and/or plurality of communication devices (e.g. lap top, cellular phone or WAP-enabled hand held computer etc.). Full remote access permits the receipt of messages at any location on any type of communication device, with remote access to functions of the message management system such as address books, security settings, rules (e.g. automated response), text-to-speech functionality etc.
Prior art messaging systems and programs such as SYMANTEC's™ TALK WORKS PRO™, SIEMENS'™ XPRESSIONS470™ NOKIA/TELEKOL's™ INTEGRAX™, INTERSIS'™ VOIXX™, KONTACT's™ VEMA2.0™ and BLUEJADE.COM's™ TECS™ do not provide full Internet access as described above, and further particularized below.
Another disadvantage of such prior art systems (with the exception of TALKWORKS™) is that such systems and computer products require the use of a multi-user server. In other words, the “unified” capability of managing the variety of messages described is owned and managed by a 3rd party service provider who acts as an intermediary between the user and entities with whom the user communicates.
It should be understood that by a “multi-user server”, a server is meant that is configured for use by more than one “user”.
There are numerous disadvantages to such prior art systems requiring such 3rd party intermediaries. First, such prior art systems generally require payment of significant user fees, payable so long as the system is used. Second, such 3rd party intermediary systems do not generally provide the full flexibility, customization, security and access to personal data, that can be provided by a private user system and computer product. Third, engaging the flexibility, customization, security and access features of such 3rd party intermediary system is cumbersome. Fourth, data associated with such 3rd party intermediary systems such as contact data needs be replicated from the user's personal server to the 3rd party systems. In most prior art systems there are security risks to such replication, as the necessary data transfers generally do not occur on a secure basis, or if security provisions are made, such security provisions may be difficult to guarantee. Fifth, use of such 3rd party intermediary systems implies providing access codes to such 3rd party. Using such access codes, a rogue would have access to the personal data of the user and could, for example, send a damaging e-mail to the contacts of the user. While such 3rd party intermediaries will generally have procedures in place to reduce the likelihood of such an occurrence, such occurrences are possible nonetheless.
Therefore, a system for providing a private communication portal is required that is easy to use and relatively inexpensive. By “private” what is meant is that the communication portal is dedicated to a user rather than multiple users as is the case with 3rd part intermediary systems described above.
It should also be understood from the outset that in referring to “private communication portal”, the word “communication” is used in accordance with its broad technical definition. In particular, “communication” for the purpose of this document means exchange or accessing of any information, including information formats, using predefined protocols understood by communicating entities. It should be understood that for “communication” to occur, there is no requirement for a human user. “Communication” can in this way be contrasted from “messaging” which is generally understood to relate to communication between more than one human user.
Also, by “portal” what is generally understood is a means for facilitating communication from point A to B. More than one interconnected computer or process may co-operate to provide a single “portal”. For example, a first computer or process comprising the “portal” may provide means for locating B at least once. Thereafter, communication between A and B may be facilitated through a second computer or process independent of the first computer or process.
In operation, the present invention provides a private communication portal for remotely managing and accessing messages, as described herein. However, it should be understood that messages are only one form of data that can be communicated in co-operation of the present invention. The invention provided herein provides means for operating private server as a communication server for a variety of purposes, including security monitoring. For example, the communication portal provided for herein could be associated with known security systems that generate data in the form of images of a physical location associated with such security system. The private communication portal described herein provides means for accessing and managing such data remotely, for example, by forwarding images detecting an intruder to an alarm response force.
Providing such a private communication portal system and computer product presents a number of problems. First, the computer on which the private communication portal resides is required to be located on the Internet using a Web browser or WAP device. Second, a system is required that provides a secure Internet connection to said computer of the user. Third, but on a related point, the system needs to authenticate the user and reject unauthorized access. Fourth, messages need be transferred securely between the remote user and said computer.
Thus a system, computer product and method for providing full Internet access to message and contact management functions is desirable, by means of a private communication portal. It is further desirable to provide a system and computer product for providing message and contact management without a 3rd party intermediary, by means of a private communication portal.
It should also be noted that 3rd party service providers such as Internet Service Providers do not generally allow their users to establish their own dedicated Internet servers, or if they do so it is at a cost that is generally significant. This is because the user's Internet Protocol address generally changes from time to time for system resource management reasons. A dedicated Internet Protocol address can be obtained, but generally only at a premium.
Thus, there is also need for a system, computer product and method for accessing and managing data remotely, even when the Internet Protocol address of a user's computer changes from time to time.